Tuesday, February 05, 2008

Im sure by now youve all heard about Luskins latest attack against the worlds irony meters:

The Research Blogging icon was designed to be used as part of that larger project. Anyone who wants to use the icon is welcome to. All you need to do is make sure that your post meets the guidelines for the project, register at the ResearchBlogging.org website, and follow the simple instructions that are provided. Casey did all but three of those things.

Yes, Casey used someone elses copyrighted image on a webpage. And worse, he did so to give his toddler-like babbling the veneer of 'scientific credibility.'

Everyone pretend to act shocked.

Pseudoscientists hijacking BPR3 was inevitable, really, so Caseys faux pas has triggered lots of interestingdiscussions about what to do. I think the 'fix' is simple: just require open comments. Pseudoscientists can yammer all they want about peer reviewed research as long as they follow the guidelines and people are able to say "Hey, youre full of crap, and heres why..." in the comments.

I really enjoy BPR3 posts myself, and I dont want their reputation sullied. But I bet you all have noticed that I havent taken part in BPR3. Personally, like Green Gabbo, I think BPR3 posts dont fit in with my writing style. I luv the idea, its just not for me right now.

BUT, Mister DNA has just invented a great icon for a lot of the posts I make, and I feel completely 'at home' using it:

I think we are going to be voting on the 'official' icon some time in the near future.

18 comments:

I'm flattered that you like the graphic - I uploaded a better one (at higher res) and here's one without the coffee stain and "FAIL" instead of the "X".

Bob O'H was wondering if anyone is going to aggregate any BPSDB posts. If the concept catches on, it might be a good idea - ID has the big tent, we might as well have the carnival.

I saw your suggestion at BPR3 about having an open comments requirement for Peer-Review blogging. It would definitely prevent the DI's echo chamber from using the graphic in the future, but you just know Dembski would try to use it and say, "Hey, we allow comments - we just moderate the hell out of them."

The new icon looks great and is much easier to read. I think aggregation is a good idea - it will enable people to see the broad similarities between all of the pseudosciences: creationism, Holocaust denial, geocentrism, germ theory denial, HIV denial, flat earth hypothesis, etc.

Just a quick off-topic note to say many thanks for all the information and entertainment your blog has provided during my lurking over the last few months. Much of the biology is incomprehensible to me (my scottish higher biology studies are many many years in the past, and to a very basic level), but because of people like yourself, NewScientist, Dawkins, Pharyngula et al, I find myself clicking links and reading and listening to a wide variety of scientific material. Weirdly enough, I've also rediscovered my love of physics as a result. Superpositions - dammit I always KNEW there was something weird going on... lol

I just wanted to wish you all the best of luck and continued success, both in your career and your blogging. As an old american friend of mine incessantly quoted, "Don't let the bastards get you down".

He stated that ID proponents were acting scientific. It's probably not exactly what he meant but he got it exactly right. They are doing their best to act as if they're scientists. Some do some De Niro style method acting but in the end it is just acting.

I can't seem to find the requirement of registering anywhere besides in the passage quoted from Questionable Authority. In fact, the Research Blogging site says: "The best way to use the icons is to register at ResearchBlogging.org."